Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01467
Original file (BC-2013-01467.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-01467
		
 			COUNSEL:  XXXXX XXXXXXXX
		
			HEARING DESIRED:  YES

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be retroactively promoted to the grade of E-6 with a date of 
rank of 1 April 2011.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He has been unable to progress through the Air Force ranks due 
to no fault of his own.  He was promoted to E-5 in the Marine 
Corps on 1 April 2006 and selected for promotion to E-6 in 2009.  
He transferred into the Air Force on 15 July 2009.  He was 
forced to take a rank reduction to accept active duty orders 
into the Air Force.  He has been in the Air Force for 3 years 
and 7 months and has not been afforded the opportunity for 
promotion.   

The Air Force is forcing him out of the service for lack of 
progression when no opportunity was afforded.  It is arbitrary 
to only consider total time for high year tenure vice his actual 
Air Force time and the forced rank reduction that now places his 
career in jeopardy.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal 
statement, e-mail correspondence, referenced AFI’s and his 
waiver request.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a member of the Air Force serving in the grade 
of staff sergeant. 

On 16 May 2013, he was notified that his request to extend his 
high year tenure was approved.  The applicant now has a high 
year tenure of 29 September 2015 and a separation date of 
15 July 2015.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this case are 
contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility which is listed at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOAR does not make a recommendation.  The applicant was 
approved for retraining into 1C311 under the Disqualified Airman 
Retraining Program.  His class dates were 13 May 2013 to 2 July 
2013.  He met all the administrative requirements for 
retraining.

The complete DPSOAR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial.  The applicant entered active duty 
as a senior airman on 16 July 2009 with prior service in the 
United States Marine Corps.  All data on prior service members 
is verified by AFPC/DPSIPE, Prior Service Enlisted Accessions, 
to determine rank, date of rank etc.  It was determined the 
applicant’s date of rank to senior airman was 16 July 2009, 
which, in itself, made him eligible for promotion consideration 
to staff sergeant for cycle 10E5.  However, he did not possess 
the required 5-skill level in accordance with AFI 36-2502, 
Airman Promotion Program.

The minimum basic eligibility criteria for promotion to staff 
sergeant is 6 months time-in-grade as a senior airman, 3 years 
time-in-service, a primary Air Force Specialty Code (PAFSC) at 
the 5-skill level and a recommendation from the commander.  The 
applicant was ineligible for promotion consideration to staff 
sergeant for cycle 10E5 because he did not possess a PAFSC at 
the 5-skill level.  In accordance with AFI 36-2502, a member 
must possess a PAFSC at 5-skill level by the respective 
promotion eligibility cutoff date for the cycle.  The PECD for 
cycle was 31 March 2010.  As of that date, the applicant had not 
obtained his 5-skill level.

Additionally, the applicant does not have an enlisted 
performance report (EPR) on file.  In accordance with AFI 36-
2502, all eligible members are required to have an EPR that 
closed out within 5 years of the PECD to compete for promotion.  
If a member does not have an EPR on file, they cannot be 
considered for promotion until their next projected EPR closes 
out, or until a directed by Headquarters Air Force EPR is 
completed for promotion consideration.  At that time, the 
applicant will be considered supplementally.

The applicant has never been eligible for consideration for 
promotion to technical sergeant.

The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states he was promoted to staff sergeant effective 
1 September 2013.  He tested for promotion in 2010 but was 
unable to be promoted due to his EPR not being completed.  Had 
an EPR been completed and submitted, he believes he would have 
been promoted the first time he tested.  

He has missed a lot of promotion opportunities over the past 
4 years.  He previously held the ranks of E-5 and E-6 in the 
Marine Corps more than 4 years ago.

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit F.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing 
law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  After 
thoroughly reviewing the applicant’s submission, the evidence of 
record and the applicant’s response to the Air Force advisories, 
we are not persuaded that he is entitled to the relief he seeks.  
The applicant contends that he was denied promotion opportunity 
due to his EPR not being completed; however, we note the 
applicant was not eligible for promotion consideration as he had 
not yet achieved his 5-level.  Additionally, once the applicant 
obtained his 5-level, he was retroactively promoted to E-5.  In 
this instance, the applicant requests retroactive promotion to 
E-6; however, he is not yet eligible for promotion consideration 
to E-6.  Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation 
of AFPC/DPSOE and adopt its rationale as the basis for our 
conclusion that the applicant is ineligible for promotion 
consideration to E-6.  In the absence of persuasive evidence to 
the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief 
sought in this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice; that the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and that 
the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of 
newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this 
application.

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2013-01467 in Executive Session on 7 January 2014, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:


The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 Mar 12, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOAR, dated 20 May 13.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 26 Apr 13.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Jun 13.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant’s Response, 23 Sep 13, w/atchs.







Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05819

    Original file (BC 2012 05819.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05819 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her current Date of Rank (DOR) be changed to reflect that she was promoted during cycle 09E5 rather than Cycle 10E5. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommended denial of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9800947

    Original file (9800947.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C) . Current Air Force promotion policy (AFI 36-2502, Table 2.2, Rule 5 , Note 2) dictates that before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the close out date of the decoration must be on or before the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD), and the date of the DECOR-6, Request for Decoration Printout (RDP) must be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00405

    Original file (BC-2006-00405.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In accordance with AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program, Table 2.1, Rule 2, dated 6 August 2002, a member must possess a PAFSC at the 5-skill level by the respective Promotion Eligibility Cutoff Date (PECD) for the cycle. They have no way of knowing whether the applicant’s commander would have approved a skill level waiver for cycle 02E5, especially since he had only been on active duty 52 days as of the PECD. He did not possess the skill level required, nor did he receive a skill...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 01472

    Original file (BC 2012 01472.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit H. AFLOA/JAJM addresses the applicant’s nonjudicial punishment (Article 15), and determines the applicant’s commander did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in making the decision to punish the applicant under Article 15. In addition, while the Board notes the applicant was denied the opportunity to test for promotion during the 10E5 promotion cycle, the fact she did not test also constitutes a harmless error because she was not...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03527

    Original file (BC-2011-03527.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of her appeal, the applicant provides copies of a screen shot of her Training Status Code from the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS), an excerpt from AFI 36-2502 Airman Promotion/Demotion Programs, her Weighted Airman Promotion System Score Notice, and an AF IMT 330, Records Transmittal/Request. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the Air Force Offices of Primary Responsibility (OPR), which are attached at...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03443

    Original file (BC-2011-03443.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The letter of reprimand (LOR) and referral EPR he received are not the norm in the Air Force for first time fitness assessment (FA) failures. The applicant failed the FA almost five months before the close- out of the evaluation in question and had over four months from the time of his FA failure to overcome the deficiency. The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02893

    Original file (BC 2013 02893.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Prior to submitting his request to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFCMR), he submitted a supplemental promotion consideration package to the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) promotions section requesting that both decorations be considered. He spoke with the Base Level Awards and Decoration Element, researched the Air Education and Training Command policy and AFI 36-2803, The Air Force Military Awards and Decorations Program, and found the Décor-6 reflects when it...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9800369

    Original file (9800369.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed this application and indicated that the contested report would normally have been eligible for promotion consideration for the 96E7 cycle to master sergeant (promotions effective Aug 96 - Jul 97). Consequently, he was ineligible for promotion consideration for the 96B7 cycle based on both the referral EPR and the PES Code “Q”. Even if the board directs removal of the referral report, the applicant would not...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02889

    Original file (BC 2013 02889.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial indicating the applicant has provided no supporting documentation or conclusive evidence that the decoration was in official channels prior to selections for promotion cycle 12E5. In accordance with...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0102076

    Original file (0102076.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02076 INDEX CODE: 111.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), rendered for the period 13 July 1999 through 31 May 2000, be removed from his records and he be provided supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) for the 01E5...